Friday, September 4, 2009

Hero of the Day - Kaleb Eulls

My question is what is so wrong in Georgia that a 14-year-old girl not only has a gun in her possession but threatens other kids with it on the school bus.

What's your opinion? Do you think this has nothing at all to do with the lax gun laws in that state and the general attitude towards guns there? Do you see no connection between the lawful gun owners who fight so hard to keep things the way they are and situations like this?

Police in the Australian state of New South Wales have reported that they pulled over a 10 year-old child driving his grandmother's car along the Newell Highway in North-Western NSW on Sunday.http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/10-year-old_child_takes_grandmother%27s_car_for_85_Km_drive

Once again, you prove my point.You focus on the "gun" and not the criminal actions of the girl.She threatened people; what difference does it make if she had used a steak knife, a baseball bat, a pipe bomb or a firearm?

It is against the law to use an object to threaten people.

She broke the law and yet you focus on the gun.

You don't ask what made her threaten people.

You don't discuss what type of parent(s) she has that lets a kid grow up thinking that threatening people is acceptable.

My thoughts: a gun is a tool. This young man used his best weapon (his wits) to defuse a situation.

A gun might have been useful, or might not.

As far as legality goes, if the person is under the age of 18, they can't legally purchase/own/possess any firearm under Federal and most State law.

Handguns cannot be sold by Federal Firearms License holders to anyone under the age of 21.

Your call--did the laws help, hurt, or not have any effect?

My thoughts--Do we know where she got the gun? was it a clearly legal owner, a "gray zone" owner, or a clearly illegal owner? Was her method of acquisition "gray zone" or illegal? (Borrowing with permission would be "gray zone", buying from a friend would break the above-mentioned laws and be illegal...and the friend's ownership might have been "gray zone" or illegal, stealing would be illegal.)

Until we know all that, we're spitting into the wind and calling it an opinion.

Mike said:"The way this contributes is that lax gun laws make it easier for guns to move from the legal world to the illegal world. Some of them end up in the hands of disturbed 14-year-olds."

See here:

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2009/08/gun_traces.php

Gun trace data to and from WV. Even though it has lax laws, more crime guns came into WV than went out. In fact more WV crime guns came from Califreakinfornia than WV sent to Cali. All those lax laws in Cali contributing to the crime in WV.

Again, it's not the gun. It's the people. As i've said before, if lax gun laws are truly the problem (or even just a part of the problem), then events like this one and the Blair Holt shooting would be more common in places like Indiana and less common in places like Illinois. Not vice versa.

Weer'd said, "Are you saying they're not more lax in Georgia than most other states?"

That's what he's sayin'. I'd say the same thing. Why? Because it's true!"

Weer'd, I think you better speak for yourself. Sevesteen is not saying that about Georgia at all, in fact he provided me with the link to the Brady ranking of Georgia as tied for number 33.

Sevesteen, as someone else pointed out without knowing where the gun came from and how exactly it got into the hands of this disturbed young girl, it's impossible to say.

And as many people keep pointing out, it's the people it's not the gun. Well, I don't dispute that it's about the people, but I say it's also about the availability of gun.

So that's my answer. The availability of firearms in Georgia may have contributed to this crime. The fact that Georgia has the kinds of gun laws it has, means simply that people who want guns don't have to drive up to N.J. to get them.